Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 May 10:344:e2838.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.e2838.

Outcomes of elective induction of labour compared with expectant management: population based study

Sarah J Stock  1 , Evelyn Ferguson, Andrew Duffy, Ian Ford, James Chalmers, Jane E Norman
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Outcomes of elective induction of labour compared with expectant management: population based study

Sarah J Stock et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To determine neonatal outcomes (perinatal mortality and special care unit admission) and maternal outcomes (mode of delivery, delivery complications) of elective induction of labour compared with expectant management.

Design: Retrospective cohort study using an unselected population database.

Setting: Consultant and midwife led obstetric units in Scotland 1981-2007.

Participants: 1,271,549 women with singleton pregnancies of 37 weeks or more gestation.

Interventions: Outcomes of elective induction of labour (induction of labour with no recognised medical indication) at 37, 38, 39, 40, and 41 weeks' gestation compared with those of expectant management (continuation of pregnancy to either spontaneous labour, induction of labour or caesarean section at a later gestation).

Main outcome measures: Extended perinatal mortality, mode of delivery, postpartum haemorrhage, obstetric anal sphincter injury, and admission to a neonatal or special care baby unit. Outcomes were adjusted for age at delivery, parity, year of birth, birth weight, deprivation category, and, where appropriate, mode of delivery.

Results: At each gestation between 37 and 41 completed weeks, elective induction of labour was associated with a decreased odds of perinatal mortality compared with expectant management (at 40 weeks' gestation 0.08% (37/44,764) in the induction of labour group versus 0.18% (627/350,643) in the expectant management group; adjusted odds ratio 0.39, 99% confidence interval 0.24 to 0.63), without a reduction in the odds of spontaneous vertex delivery (at 40 weeks' gestation 79.9% (35,775/44,778) in the induction of labour group versus 73.7% (258,665/350,791) in the expectant management group; adjusted odds ratio 1.26, 1.22 to 1.31). Admission to a neonatal unit was, however, increased in association with elective induction of labour at all gestations before 41 weeks (at 40 weeks' gestation 8.0% (3605/44,778) in the induction of labour group compared with 7.3% (25,572/350,791) in the expectant management group; adjusted odds ratio 1.14, 1.09 to 1.20).

Conclusion: Although residual confounding may remain, our findings indicate that elective induction of labour at term gestation can reduce perinatal mortality in developed countries without increasing the risk of operative delivery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; and no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

None
(Top) Percentage of induced singleton deliveries (total induction of labour, IOL) in Scotland 1981-2007, with proportion of elective inductions (no recognised medical indication) and postdates inductions (no recognised medical indication but ≥41 weeks’ gestation). (Bottom) Proportion of induced labour carried out by artificial rupture of membranes (with or without oxytocin) or by prostaglandins in Scotland 1981-2007
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Mealing NM, Roberts CL, Ford JB, Simpson JM, Morris JM. Trends in induction of labour, 1998-2007: a population-based study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2009;49:599-605. - PubMed
    1. Gulmezoglu AM, Crowther CA, Middleton P. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;(4):CD004945. - PubMed
    1. Smith GC. Life-table analysis of the risk of perinatal death at term and post term in singleton pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;184:489-96. - PubMed
    1. Vahratian A, Zhang J, Troendle JF, Sciscione AC, Hoffman MK. Labor progression and risk of cesarean delivery in electively induced nulliparas. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:698-704. - PubMed
    1. Luthy DA, Malmgren JA, Zingheim RW. Cesarean delivery after elective induction in nulliparous women: the physician effect. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:1511-5. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms